Energy Efficiency: How Does Your State Rank?

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) released its sixth annual State Energy Efficiency Scorecard. Once again, Massachusetts took the No. 1 spot, followed by California, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Washington, Maryland, and Minnesota.

According to the council's scorecard, Mississippi is the state most in need of improvement, followed by North Dakota, West Virginia, Wyoming, South Dakota, Alaska, Kansas, Missouri, Louisiana, and Nebraska.

The three most improved states were Oklahoma, Montana, and South Carolina. All three states significantly increased their budgets for electric efficiency programs in 2011. Oklahoma put natural gas efficiency programs in place for the first time, and Montana dramatically increased its budget for these programs, according to the ACEEE. Other states making significant progress included Arizona, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania, all of which increased their budgets for energy efficiency under statewide energy savings goals.

Energy is not a partisan issue. ACEEE executive director Steven Nadel said in a press release that the findings show that energy efficiency is being embraced by both Republicans and Democrats at the state level, and that energy efficiency is a way to extend supply. "While some supply investments will be needed, the truth is that step one should always be energy efficiency, our cheapest, cleanest, and fastest energy resource."

Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts said in the release that his state remains No. 1 because of its continued focus on innovation and investments in energy efficiency. "Our Green Communities Act is cutting our dependence on imported energy sources, creating jobs, and leading the way to a more sustainable energy future."

Ben Foster, an ACEEE senior policy analyst and the lead author of the State Scoreboard study, said in the release that more states are taking action to improve energy efficiency. "It's no secret why they want to accomplish that," he said. "Energy efficiency is a pragmatic and effective strategy for promoting economic growth, creating jobs, and securing environmental benefits."

According to the scorecard, 24 states have adopted and funded an Energy Efficiency Resource Standard program that sets long-term savings targets and drives investments in utility efficiency programs. The states with the most aggressive savings targets are Arizona, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Ten states have adopted energy efficiency codes for new building construction that exceed the IECC 2009 or ASHRAE 90.1-2007 codes for residential and commercial buildings. Two other states, Maryland and Illinois, have advanced even further by adopting the most recent and most stringent code for residential construction.

Given the results of states on energy efficiency, the pattern seems to be that wealthy states do better than poor states. That fact that Massachusetts is at the top and Mississippi is at the bottom says a lot.

People must provide personal information and register on the ACEEE site before they can download the report. I don't know whay sites do this sort of thing, but it presents a barrier that keeps me from going any farther.

I may be wrong, but I always assume that when web sites ask for personal info, they want to sell it to someone. Maybe I'm being paranoid, but I feel the same way you do, Jon. I never provide that information.

I'd be willing to bet that providing the information gets you onto their "sucker list" to be solicited for donations to help promote their agenda. Also sold/shared with other so-called "green" groups (probably so designated because their main function is to raise more "green" this way).

I find it interesting that (based on this article) the ranking seems to have nothing to do with energy efficiency, just spending and planning.

If my state spends big $$$ to save "x" energy, but the effort required to build and implement these changes uses "2x" energy, I come out on top. Why would anyone do this? We do it now, with products that use more energy to manufacture and distribute than they will save in their lifetime. We do it with ethanol, which also generates more pollution than it saves.

I wonder how this list of most "Efficient" states correlates to fiscal health ? I notice that California is ranked towards the top in energy efficiency (legislation X spending), but is also effectively in a state of bankruptcy.

My friends who live in California like to hold up their state as a shining example of progressive policy, and I tend to agree with them! This point will finally be driven home, unfortunately, only when it is too late; when the multitude of public sector workers (as well as nanny-state entitlement junkies) notice their pay (and pension) checks are absent from their mailboxes. Enter bedlam. Energy effeciency spending will count for naught then....

I agree that improvement to energy efficiency is a desireable goal, but this is only rational if the underlying society/economy is viable/sustainable to begin with.

Twas a Reagan quote during debates many years ago. At any rate Rob, DN has the knack at times to make me see RED (excuse the pun). Who are these guys, how are they funded, and what is their criteria?

I googled ["american council for an energy-efficient economy" board of directors "council of foreign relations" members]. Seems like everyone on the ACEEE board is a CFR member, yet it is a non-profit. The CFR, by the way is a rather clandestine group of world shapers. I googled this not because I'm a conspiracy theorist, but because I could find few details on the ACEEE.

How are they funded? Foundations, power companies, and you and I as "contributions" are added to our power bill, seemingly without choice.

Their criteria is each states spending on green tech. Maine dropped significantly (see:http://www.nrcm.org/news_detail.asp?news=5001). Its all about speding tax money.

I bring all this up as my air conditioning guy was telling me quite an interesting story. In the big markets, big AC guys are spending to the tune of $100k to buy "testing equipment". It hooks to a house and does both positive and negative pressurization. To "pass" requires an average of $40k of improvements per existing home. In the future, he claims zoning laws will be changed to make this a requirement, thus if you need a new roof, etc, you will need to bring your home "up to code". True we will save energy - but at what cost?

Seems to me the Watermelons are at large again. Green on the outside, Red on the inside. I really fear for my nation. When government is watching out for me I keep one hand on my wallet.

Very interesting points Island_Al. Thanks for your research. Certainly a number of those commenting are calling into question whether the study is measuring spending on energy efficiency or progress on energy efficiency. And they really are different things.

It's hard to trust this when I'm paying almost $5/gallon for gas because of higher environmental standards leading to a California specific gas shortage.

The pattern I see is the coastal states (with the exception on MN) do better. The bottom tier (with the exception of WV) is in the center of the country. That's an unfortunately common pattern when it comes to innovation.

It won't be too much longer and hardware design, as we used to know it, will be remembered alongside the slide rule and the Karnaugh map. You will need to move beyond those familiar bits and bytes into the new world of software centric design.

People who want to take advantage of solar energy in their homes no longer need to install a bolt-on solar-panel system atop their houses -- they can integrate solar-energy-harvesting shingles directing into an existing or new roof instead.

Kaspersky Labs indicated at its February meeting that cyber attacks are far more sophisticated than previous thought. It turns out even air-gapping (disconnecting computers from the Internet to protect against cyber intrusion) isn’t a foolproof way to avoid getting hacked. And Kaspersky implied the NSA is the smartest attacker.

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.